brickipediafandomcom-20200229-history
Forum:The Great Minifigure Split
01:23, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #: # I made an example of something like this here. ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 10:34, February 23, 2011 (UTC) # 10:40, February 23, 2011 (UTC) # --Cligra 20:45, February 23, 2011 (UTC) Continue having one article per character #I strongly oppose the idea of having separate articles for different variants of one Minifigure, due to the fact that we will be explaining the same thing that we described on variant one. Tatooine 01:13, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #:Not if we eliminate the background. If we take this out, we can very well have separate articles. Lego lord 01:16, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #It would make no sense to eliminate the Background section, it's informative and needed. It shouldn't be removed, only to have seperate articles or other style questions, we need to find an other way. I oppose since I see no difficulties in having descriptions like behind the name, if it's only done consistently. It wouldn't be template-compatible if we would have several Anakin pages. Minifigure split is too complex, having the short variant name behind a character is enough. No problems with the background section, too. And visitors probably want to know something about the Anakin Skywalker minifigure, without first having to click through several pages of minifigure variants. It works well with the current variants section and MinifigureGallery template, so I see no need to change it. 12:57, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #: Background section is a different proposal by lego lord, not related to this at all. ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 21:39, February 23, 2011 (UTC) # Would mess around with sections and waste time, plus make it a lot more time consuming to read about every single variation when it could all go on one article. 13:55, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #:# I am working on my own wiki project for every minifigures, each with their own article for every variant, so I don't want this getting in the way. Lego lord 21:02, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #::::Umm... I accept your answer. I jsut don't want to throw my wiki away. Lego lord 23:06, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #I don't think that we need an article for every variation - all of the info can be reasonably contained on one page. Ajraddatz 23:13, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #:I know, that's why I want my own wiki. Lego lord 23:31, February 23, 2011 (UTC) #Take Luke Skywalker for example. There are about 20 variants of him, and if we had 1 page per article, it would be much harder to find the minifigure page your looking for. 02:01, February 24, 2011 (UTC) #:No, ever heard of disambiguations? Lego lord 02:03, February 24, 2011 (UTC) #Four words: separate pages cause clutter. If the variations have different names, they should redirect to the appropriate hub page. FB100Z • talk • 19:15, February 24, 2011 (UTC) #Agreed. It would be too much to manage. --TheGrandEditor 18:12, February 27, 2011 (UTC) Comments * Would it be ok with everyone for this vote to last one week? 01:06, February 23, 2011 (UTC) *@Lego lord: I find it unnecessary to have 5+ articles for i.e, Darth Vader when it could belong in one page.:T Tatooine 01:20, February 23, 2011 (UTC) *You're right, it should only be one article, however the background is not needed since it isn't LEGO's background. Lego lord 01:23, February 23, 2011 (UTC) ** And this is being discussed in a separate topic. Please keep on topic. 01:24, February 23, 2011 (UTC) ***Alright, just got a little carried away. Lego lord 01:25, February 23, 2011 (UTC) **** No worries :) 01:26, February 23, 2011 (UTC) * Thinking about some details ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 22:42, February 23, 2011 (UTC) * Can we have a vote to strike Lego lord's vote admins? The reason is just plain selfishness. And yes, I've seen the huge commented out discussion, but we're meant to be deciding what's going on with our wiki, and not be worrying about some other new minor place. 22:52, February 23, 2011 (UTC) ::Why not. :::Well, yes, I do think its selfish, so I would support. ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 22:58, February 23, 2011 (UTC) ::::Can you please not call me selfish? I am reconsidering my vote. Lego lord 02:25, February 24, 2011 (UTC) :::::I didn't, I called the vote selfish. ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 15:11, February 24, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Why do you call it a minor place? Lego lord 17:11, February 24, 2011 (UTC) :::::::That directed at Nighthawk? ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 17:44, February 24, 2011 (UTC) ::::::::Yes. I already have 100 articles, how is it minor if I made that much within the first 10 days? Lego lord 17:45, February 24, 2011 (UTC) * Lego lord's vote striked per below. ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 16:56, February 25, 2011 (UTC) Vote to remove Lego lord's vote # No, I'm not being biased, if he was voting for the split, I would have done the same thing. 23:04, February 23, 2011 (UTC) # 23:05, February 23, 2011 (UTC) # ---Keep Calm and Carry On--- Kingcjc 23:07, February 23, 2011 (UTC) # 23:12, February 23, 2011 (UTC) Oppose }}